Wolk Concedes, Endorses Dodd for November

Bill Dodd address supporters on Election Night in Napa - courtesy photo from the Dodd campaign.
Bill Dodd address supporters on Election Night in Napa – courtesy photo from the Dodd campaign.

Late on Wednesday afternoon, when the returns came in from both Napa and Yolo county that had Bill Dodd in first by 669 votes over Charlie Schaupp, and Dan Wolk trailed Mr. Schaupp for second place by 1126 votes, the writing was on the wall that Dan Wolk was not going to succeed in his bid for the State Assembly.

He was not ready to publicly concede on Wednesday night, but on Thursday afternoon the Wolk campaign sent out a release announcing that Dan Wolk had called both called Bill Dodd and Charlie Schaupp on Wednesday night to congratulate them for placing in the top two of last Tuesday’s Primary Election and continuing on to the November General Election.

In his conversation with Dodd, he pledged his support and promised to do whatever he could do to help get the Napa County Supervisor elected to the Assembly.

“I want to thank all of my opponents for a hard-fought campaign, and my supporters and volunteers from throughout the district for the countless hours they dedicated to our effort,” said Dan Wolk, who will be seated as Mayor of Davis on July 1. “I am incredibly proud of the campaign we ran, focusing on rebuilding the California Dream, championing the middle class and reinvesting in California’s public schools.”

Dan Wolk “made the decision to concede after more than ten thousand votes were counted and reported by Napa and Yolo Counties, giving Dodd a strong lead. He cited his shared vision for California in his decision to endorse his fellow Democrat, Dodd.”

“I am happy to endorse Bill Dodd to represent the 4th Assembly District. I know Bill will be an excellent, hardworking representative for the diverse communities in this district – and I look forward to working with him to make California better,” said Mr. Wolk.

Dan Wolk will continue to serve on the Davis City Council, and will be sworn in for a two-year term as mayor on July 1.

“My commitment to the issues we focused on in our campaign will not fade and I will continue working to make our communities better, in Davis and beyond,” Mr. Wolk said regarding his future.

The Dodd campaign put out a brief statement from Bill Dodd, a Democrat, who will face Republican Charlie Schaupp in November.

Bill Dodd stated, “Dan Wolk was a formidable opponent who made this campaign a more vibrant exchange of ideas for the future of California. I valued the occasions we shared the stage at candidate forums to discuss how our state should move forward improving our public schools, infrastructure and environmental protections.”

He added, “I am honored to have Dan’s support for the November general election and look forward to working with him to serve the residents of Davis and all of Assembly District 4.”

The Assembly race had been too close to call a week after the election.

On Wednesday, the Assembly Race dynamics changed in a dramatic way as the two largest counties – Napa and Yolo Counties – completed the bulk of their uncounted ballots.

The results were dramatic as Bill Dodd initially surged to a huge lead when the Napa votes came in, and that lead remained after Yolo County came in (where Bill Dodd performed poorly compared to Dan Wolk and Charlie Schaupp).

At the end of the day, Bill Dodd was in first place by 669 votes over Charlie Schaupp, and Dan Wolk trailed Mr. Schaupp for second place by 1126 votes.

The Vanguard’s analysis this week suggested Charlie Schaupp would finish first and Bill Dodd a close second with Dan Wolk about 1000 ballots off. The Dodd campaign now believes that Bill Dodd will prevail and finish first. However, that point is academic.

In November Bill Dodd will face Charlie Schaupp. While Mr. Schaupp was able to win a spot for November, the district is heavily Democratic. The registration is 45.8 percent Democratic, 26.1 percent Republican and 25.7 percent Independent.

In 2008, Obama won this district 64.8 to 32.2 over McCain.  Prop 8 failed 55-42.  Governor Brown won handily, 57-36 over Meg Whitman.

For 18 years, Davis has been represented by a female Assemblymember from the city of Davis.  The last time a resident of Napa County had reached the state legislature was 1980.

—David M. Greenwald reporting

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts


    1. Good Government

      But seriously…the spotlight is now firmly on Bill Dodd. Will he stay true to how he portrayed himself on the campaign, as pro-choice, pro-environment, pro-public schools “moderate Democrat”? Or will his Republican roots take over as some have feared? This is especially acute regarding environmental issues, which he touted in campaign literature, yet also found himself supported by big oil. If there is a fracking vote, for example, in the next two years, all eyes should be on Dodd.

      1. Rich RifkinWDE 73

        SB4, which was approved last December, regulates fracking in California. Some environmental groups (wrongly in my opinion) said it is too lax. Both Yamada and Wolk voted yes on SB4.

        This week, there was another Senate bill, which would have put a moratorium on fracking. It died in the Senate due to a tie vote, which happened because a bunch of Democrats abstained and four (all of whom have accepted donations from the Western States Petroleum Coalition) joined all the Republicans in voting no. Wolk voted yes.

      2. David Greenwald

        GG: During the campaign, I tried to stay out of that fray. But now I’ll say something, I met with Bill Dodd back in January and he laid out why he had switched parties, basically the Republican party had moved too far to the right for him.

        It’s a weird attack line, because in my mind Democrats should want Republicans to switch sides, not attack them when they do.

        1. Good Government

          It was not intended as an “attack line”. Some people are legitimately worried Bill will vote like a Republican. I don’t think I’m breaking new ground to say that. I imagine he’ll be a solid Dem on many of the social issues. Economic and environmental issues, however, remain an open question.

        2. Tia Will

          “It’s a weird attack line, because in my mind Democrats should want Republicans to switch sides, not attack them when they do.”

          I would say that depends on their motives for making the switch. You have had the opportunity that many of us have not to speak with Bill Dodd directly and gain insight into his sincerity.

          And regardless of motivation, many of us perceive another factor here. For those of us who are left leaning, an influx of Republicans who are changing sides because of the move to the right of the Republicans may be seen as a weakening of the principles that keep us in the Democratic party. Not a desirable outcome from my point of view.

          1. Tia Will

            Davis Progressive.

            “the democratic party’s principles are pretty low to begin with.”

            I disagree. I do not believe that the principles are low. Please notice that I did not say anything about how this plays out in the real world of politics where lip service is paid to principle and the outcome is frequently “low”.
            I would actually say the same for the “principles ” of the Republican party.
            Idealzed principles on both sides are quite lofty. The problem lies in implementation.

          2. Davis Progressive

            tia’s comment is probably more close to accurate. it’s not the party platform that i disagree with so much as the implementation and often the lack of fortitude on the part of individual democrats.

        3. Frankly

          Well at least you admit there are sides. If politics are a reflection of strongly held values, then how can you “switch sides” and why would you celebrate that?

          Republicans have not shifted right, the population has shifted left from the flood of poor and uneducated immigrants. Dodd knows how to tickle those on the left… people that gravitate toward things that make them feel good.

          1. Don Shor

            Republicans have not shifted right

            False. Proven before that it is false, repeatedly. The Republican Party has shifted to the right in California and nationwide.

  1. South of Davis

    David wrote:

    > For 18 years, Davis has been represented by a female Assemblymember
    > from the city of Davis. The last time a resident of Napa County had
    > reached the state legislature was 1980.

    If “Diversity” was not just a code word for “more women and minorities” the people in Davis that support “Diversity” should be happy to have a white (former Republican) male representing Davis for the first time since Carter was in the White House…

          1. Michelle Millet

            To think one of them hasn’t held our Assembly seat in 18 years, women got their turn, it’s time to go back to the status quo.

          2. Davis Progressive

            as a white man myself, i’m happy to share the burden with non-whites and non-men

          3. Michelle Millet

            What, do you have something against men? or just white men?

            Over the past 2 months I’ve woken up 6:30 every Saturday morning (FYI-I like sleeping in) so I could be at Farmer’s Market to set up a booth, by myself-have you every tried setting up one of those big pop up tents alone? Not an easy task-for one of the city council candidates. I also spent many Saturday and Sunday afternoon walking precincts for this candidate and I personally probably delivered close to 250 yard signs.

            The candidate in question happened to be a white male, doesn’t seem I have problem with men, white or otherwise

          4. Barack Palin

            Then why the sarcastic comment?

            “I know, we need more white males in politics, there are not enough of them.”

          1. Frankly

            Looks can be deceiving. The girls on Fox News sure look like women to me… but you might have a point.

            Related to this… there seems to be at least one correlation.

            Passive-aggressive, versus just plain aggressive. I wonder if testosterone plays a part in political orientation? That would be an interesting study.

            I did read somewhere that in several studies Republicans always claimed they were happier than liberals would claim. I am also thinking there may be some connection with endorphins.

      1. South of Davis

        wdf1 wrote:

        > SoD: You’re making a case for affirmative action for historically
        > oppressed white, male, (former) Republicans?

        No just pointing out that anyone who is in favor of “diversity” should be happy when our AD is represented by someone with “diverse” views from a “different” county.

        I have yet to read a single story where even one person who is a fan of “diversity” has complained that a group needs some white male republicans to be “diverse”.

        1. Michelle Millet

          I have yet to read a single story where even one person who is a fan of “diversity” has complained that a group needs some white male republicans to be “diverse”.

          Maybe because there already so many white males that adding more doesn’t actually increase diversity?

        2. Frankly

          “Diversity” in Democrat speak is code for anti white male.

          Just like the French who sympathized with Germany during the war, some people join the other side for survival and posterity sake. But like for those French people, it does not end well.

          For example there are married white male haters that have had sons and those sons end up facing the female gender domination on the college campus… the girl waking up with regrets and claiming the boy was guilty of sexual misconduct.

          Of course they are good people holding liberal views, and good people holding conservative views. In my experience, there are a lot more good liberals holding views of intolerance for certain “isms” than there are good conservatives doing the same. A good conservative does not care about anything other than behavior. It is liberals obsessed with all the things that should be superficial and demanding oppression of one for the benefit of the other.

          1. Michelle Millet

            “Diversity” in Democrat speak is code for anti white male.

            If this is true it is because politics historically has been been dominated by this demographic, and for the most part still is today.

            Frankly what would think of “diversity” if it was women who dominated political leadership? Would you be arguing for diversity then? Would you claim that any man who wanted to see more men in leadership roles where “women haters”

          2. Frankly

            If this is true it is because politics historically has been been dominated by this demographic, and for the most part still is today.

            Yeah… those damn white males that established this great nation. What were they thinking? If only they had demanded participation from women and people of color, I’m sure our founding documents would have been that much more great!

            Frankly what would think of “diversity” if it was women who dominated political leadership? Would you be arguing for diversity then? Would you claim that any man who wanted to see more men in leadership roles where “women haters”

            If the domination is based on drive, determination, interest and ability… I don’t give a rat’s ass. Really.

            If it is because the system is broken and not providing the same opportunity, then I want it fixed.

            There is nothing broken in the system as it relates to politics. Sure there are gender issues and biases that exist in society, but until and unless we can figure out a way to make men and women completely the same and remove all the physiological differences through medical science breakthroughs, we are going to have to accept it.

            Those progressive European countries that American liberals like to point at as examples for how we should live… all have some pretty strongly held cultural biases toward masculinity and femininity. I think we should stop stupidly just counting numbers and dig a little deeper in what men and women really want and how they are really different.

            I think Hillary may not run for President in 2016. If she does not, it will cause some good discussion about why.

          3. Michelle Millet

            If only they had demanded participation from women and people of color, I’m sure our founding documents would have been that much more great!

            Yes those poor white men having to do all the hard work while those slacker women and black slaves sat around reaping the rewards. We should thank them for enslaving black people and denying women rights.

            We will never know what this country would be like if women and minorities had participated in the process of it’s formation because this right was denied to them by the individuals you hold in such great esteem.

      2. Michelle Millet

        These guys need our help. Women make up 26% of the California legislature. That means 1 out of every 4 legislator is a women, that is insane. We really need to figure out a way to get that number down to a more “token” level.

        1. Frankly

          I think women are too smart and too ethical to run for politics. Unless we want more stupid and unethical woman running around, we should celebrate their lower representation in politics.

          BTW, why don’t you run for city council?

  2. Davis Progressive

    wolk falls and you kind of feel some sympathy for him. it’s easy to say that wolk would have won had it not been for joe, but i was not prepared to vote for him at all though i know some voted for him just to get him off the council if you can believe that.

        1. Good Government

          And some people wondered who I was referring to when I said “Wolk-haters”. Seriously. I get that we’re both anonymous posters. But saying a council member, all of whom put in countless hours for almost no pay, “didn’t lift a finger” is an asinine assertion that can only be said by someone unwilling to put his or her name next to it. Just plain stupid.

          1. Davis Progressive

            so can you tell me the list of accomplishments achieved by dan wolk while on council?

          2. Barack Palin

            If you’re a union firefighter I can think of a couple of votes that they would list.

          3. Good Government

            Dan and Rochelle were instrumental in creating the Water Advisory Committee. They led the effort to move away from the originally approved project and rates and create a better process and product. Dan was also the lone voice speaking strongly against CBFR in December 2012. Perhaps if the WAC, Chamber, and Mayor Krovoza hadn’t pushed so hard for CBFR, we wouldn’t be in the situation we’re now in with the rate structure.

            Dan defended our community’s affordable housing requirements, which were watered-down by Krovoza and others.

            Dan was also a leader on Cannery, a project Krovoza also tried to own on the campaign trail, despite is spastic 11th-hour vote against it.

            I’m sure you disagree with Dan on fire staffing, but he didn’t arrive at his positions lightly. He did his homework, listened to BOTH sides (something he tends to do) and arrived at a conclusion.

            In fact, I’m sure you disagree with Dan on lots of issues. But that doesn’t mean he didn’t do work. You could ask the same of any Council member. What are their “accomplishments”? What has Joe “accomplished” that you can say was an individual accomplishment and not one owned by the whole Council? Mori Seiki and Davis Roots? That’s more Rochelle’s doing than anyone else (IMO). The budgets? The council passed those unanimously and ALL did A LOT of work on them.

          4. Davis Progressive

            it’s not necessarily that i disagree with dan on the issues, but i disagree that he was instrumental. first of all, the wac was really the idea of souza that dan wolk and rochelle swanson incorporated when they were looking for a softer landing spot after they had to retreat on water. the funny thing is that neither wolk nor rochelle were exactly blameless in that fiasco, both had concerns on september 6 but ultimately caved to krovoza and souza to form the 4-1 only to retreat three months later.

            it’s also interesting that you failed to mention the cbfr fiasco where wolk tried to order the wac to not pursue cbfr and a week later was cutting a deal to make it so.

          5. Davis Progressive

            on affordable housing casthing losing votes isn’t an accomplishment.

            wolk was not a leader on cannery. he originally questioned cannery, the project was already underway, he may have voted for it, but his votes didn’t shape the direction of the project in any way, shape or form.

            dan flip-flopped on fire when he was running for assembly trying to get teh firefighters endorsement – which he did.

            mori seiki happened before wolk was even on council. that was swanson and krovoza’s work.


            so too was davis roots. techdavis was rochelle. rob white was rochelle.

            the only thing i’ll give wolk credit for was casting that deciding vote on the budget, which as rifkin points out was largely a pointless gesture, but it did piss off the employees and force wolk to have to make amends.

          6. Good Government

            You’re right, Dan pushed not to consider CBFR. WAC and Krovoza (and others) pushed back, so Dan cut a deal that mitigated the worst of CBFR (a look-back without warning). A year and a half later, CBFR is still a thorny issue and a major reason the public opposes the project and the rates. Maybe Dan should have been listened to in the beginning and we should have scrapped CBFR. Maybe Dan was right all along.

          7. Davis Progressive

            “Joe gets Zipcar, Road Diet, and CBFR. Thise are his to own.”

            man you really don’t know the history of davis.

            zipcar was a staff deal that council voted on in five minutes in joe’s first meeting. he had nothing to do with zipcar other than voting on it.

            the road diet was approved in 2009 by council before joe was on.

            cbfr was developed by matt williams and frank loge, joe voted for it, but it wasn’t his doing.

          8. Davis Progressive

            “Maybe Dan was right all along.”

            maybe dan was afraid all along is more like it. dan wanted to implement a rate structure that would have cost the low end users 50% more per gallon than the high end users.

          9. Good Government

            I appreciate that you are actually making some substantive claims rather than just using blanket hyperbole. I disagree with a lot of what you said, including that Dan “originally questioned Cannery”. Would love to see evidence of that beyond just literally asking questions in a meeting.

            But the bottom line remains. Saying Dan”hardly lifted a finger” is just silly. Agree, disagree, but don’t say he hasn’t done the work. That’s just not true.

          10. Good Government

            This is getting tiresome. I didn’t say Joe invented CBFR, but he strongly advocated for it and continues to do so. He also strongly advocated for the road diet in his city council campaign.

            Joe also tried to make us all park backwards downtown!

            I’ve got to go back to work. I’m out on this discussion. Have fun!

          11. David Greenwald

            Goood Government: I met with most of the candidates back in 2011 who were seeeking appointment. At that time, Dan Wolk told me he was in favor of killing the Cannery Project. Shortly thereafter, at the first workshop on Cannery, he was completely in favor of it.

          12. Good Government

            DG: I think that’s news! I’ve certainly never heard it. And Dan never said that to me in our (admittedly few) conversations on the subject. Was that ever printed somewhere?

  3. Good Government

    Have we confirmed whether “Mr. Classy” Krovoza has called to congratulate the winners of this election? Has he called Dan to congratulate him for kicking his butt in the election?

    1. chriszlee

      For someone who complains about all the “anti-Wolk” sentiment you see on the Vangaurd, you sure don’t seem to mind going on the offense yourself. I’m assuming you are somehow implying Mayor Krovoza is not classy? Also, I would imagine most of the Vanguard readers can read and comprehend the election numbers/results for themselves — I don’t think it’s really necessary to phrase it the way you did.

      I’m going to guess since you’re asking that question, you know if Mayor Krovoza has/hasn’t called Dan yet? And if you’re privy to such information, I would assume you’re close to Dan? And judging by your comments and combined with this inference, I would assume you want to support Dan the best way you can?

      If such is true, I would suggest you really stop with your anti-Krovoza campaign you seem to be running on the Vanguard commentary. Dan seemed to get a lot of flak for the negative mailers sent out on his behalf, and I don’t think your addition to this will necessarily be in the best interest for him. Why not focus more on the good Dan has done rather than always worrying about Mayor Krovoza?

      1. chriszlee

        *edit: By the way, I don’t know who Mayor Krovoza has/hasn’t called, but I respect him a lot as I have said in previous comments. I think he is an extremely “classy” guy and what he chooses to do are his own. I will say the same for Dan too.

      2. Good Government

        “GG sounds like an insider.” I appreciate the compliment, though I’m sure it was not intended as such. I’m not an “insider”, though I did knock on a couple of doors for Dan. Yes, I support him. No, I’m not a fan of Krovoza. I find Dan to be a much better listener, less of a slick politician than Joe. I do feel like most commenters here fawn over Joe for reasons I don’t understand. So I try to counterbalance that. Joe got a lot of credit on this blog, which I believe to be undue, for “staying positive” and “above the fray” and for being “classy” by lamenting the negative attacks on his opponents. I found the first two compliments to be the result of simple circumstance (the IE groups not seeing him as a threat and ignoring him) and the latter to be political opportunism by a candidate struggling for relevance. I don’t know whether he has called Bill, Charlie, or Dan to congratulate them on beating him. I think it would be the classy thing to do.

        1. chriszlee

          How is being unnecessarily negative by making jibes at how “classy” Joe, or as you phrased it “Mr. Classy”, is and saying he got his “butt kicked” counterbalancing readers “fawning” over Joe? And maybe readers here fawn over Joe for good reason? Perhaps, readers think he is an experienced leader and like what he has done on council? I think you underestimate the intellectual capacity of Vanguard readers — they don’t seem like the type to mindlessly follow any given candidate for no good reason.

          Or are these readers perhaps “sycophants”?

          Dan played politics, whether you care to admit it or not, he did. The whole Koch brothers shtick? That was an obvious attempt at Dan playing on partisan politics and cues.

          Also, I never heard Dan make a statement on those IE’s he allegedly was not connected with in anyway. His silence on the matter was all too deafening. Perhaps, the IE groups ignored him because of a certain Senator Wolk who is still a sitting member of the legislature until 2016 and can/will have a say on legislation that they care about?

          I’m not here to be anti-Wolk, but I think you really need to look at your logic in taking the offense against Krovoza.

        2. Rich RifkinWDE 73

          “I find Dan to be a much better listener, less of a slick politician than Joe. I do feel like most commenters here fawn over Joe for reasons I don’t understand.”

          Both Joe and Dan are nice guys. However, Joe has a lot more integrity. Dan sold out to the corrupt public employee unions who are bankrupting Davis, Yolo County and the state of California.

          It’s kind of like a person who writes his opinions under his own name. That shows a level of integrity. People with no integrity will rip a Joe Krovoza, and they will do so using a fake name like “good government”, even though they don’t want good governance, what they really obviously want is to be enriched by the government using corruption of union and corporate financing of campaigns.

          1. Barack Palin

            Once Wolk did the two pro firefighter union votes he was over in my book. He and Frerichs will never live those votes down.

    2. Charlie_Schaupp

      Good Gov — I Can’t say about Dan Wolk, if Joe Krovosa Called him or not, but Joe did call me. And over of the past few months Joe was the candidate I grew to admire and respect the most of the 3 ‘Democrats’. Our political views are different…but I can’t any fault, whatsoever, with Joe’s honesty, knowledge, or integrity. My view is Joe is a good guy…and if you want to blame someone for Wolk’s loss, don’t look at Joe, rather look towards those PACs and IE’s that threw their weight behind Dodd. Even ‘everyone’s favorite supervisor’ -Matt Rexroad- (biting my tongue in saying that) who happens to be part owner of a conservative GOP leaning consultant firm, threw his support to Dodd 30 days before the election. And Matt messaged me it was going to support Dodd to keep Wolk out of the Assembly. Matt also told me about the Pro Dodd/Anit Wolk IE mailings that were going out in the mail that week. In other words…There was some ‘Monkey Business’ going on in this election and Joe was not behind it or responsible for it.

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
Sign up for